1 

'JRNRY CABOT LODGE 



^7 



H5 



'Ofiy J 




Copyright by Cllnedlnst 



Symphony Hall, Boston, January 3, 191 1 



t 

c5 



HENRY CABOT LODGE 



TRUTH 
ABOUT LODGE 



HE 



DIRECTOR IN ANY CORPORATION — good, bad or 



indifferent. 



HP has DEVOTED HIS LIFE to 
tw the STATE AND NATION. 

HP has always been JUST and 
^ FAIR TO LABOR AND 
CAPITAL. 

HP STOOD AGAINST WALL 
■-^ STREET in demanding that 
GREAT BRITAIN SHOULD WITH- 
DRAW FROM VENEZUELA. 



HE 
HE 



CUBA. 



did this in DEFIANCE of the 
VESTED INTERESTS. 



WITH- 
DRAWAL of SPAIN FROM 



HP did this again in DEFIANCE 
^ OF the outbursts from THE 
INTERESTS. 

HP WORKED FOR AND ADVO- 
t-' CATED THE great SHER- 
MAN ANTI-TRUST LAW. This is 
the law under which the SUGAR 
TRUST, THE STANDARD OIL, the 
TOBACCO TRUST are being prose- 
cuted. 

|_| p helped frame the law for 



REGULATION 
ROAD RATES. 



OF RAIL- 



LI p brought the STANDARD OIL 
ERNMENT CONTROL. 



Lip HELPED perfect the National 



HE 



HE 



PURE FOOD LAW. 

is the author of the an-end- 
ment which MAKES LABELS 

ON BOTTLES DESCRIBE THEIR 

CONTENTS. 

VOTED FOR THE COR- 
PORATION TAX — BITTER- 
LY OPPOSED BY THE INTER- 
ESTS. 

HP fought for the PRESERVA- 
■^ TION OF OUR NATIONAL 
RESOURCES. 

HP DENOUNCED Bryan and his 
*^ "FREE SILVER" bill. 

did more FOR THE HON- 
EST DOLLAR than any man 
in the United States Senate. 



HE 



HE 



is an AUTHORITY at home 
and abroad on the important 

FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE 

UNITED STATES. 



HE 



has always worked FOR 
CHILD LABOR LAWS. 



LI P is RECOGNIZED throughout 

n Cr the world as a STATESMAN, 
HONEST, INTELLIGENT AND 
FEARLESS. 



HE 



is not a "MARKET MAKER" 
"MANIPULATOR" "DIREC- 
TOR" "EXPLOITER" in the stock 
market. 



THESE ARE FACTS YOU 
OUGHT TO KNOW 



NORMAN H. WHITE, 

Brookline, Mass., 105 Gardner Road. 



SENATOR GEORGE FRISBIE HOAR, 

Massachusetts' Great Scholar and Statesman, wrote the 
following concerning Senator Lodge : 

Washington, March 13, 1904. 
JVIy Dear Colleagiie : — 

While, as you know, I have differed and, in all probability am 
likely to differ hereafter, as to the attitude this country should 
maintain toward weak nations or peoples who are fitted very im- 
perfectly for self-government, and while I thoroughly approve every- 
thing that has been done in regard to Cuba and wish now that the 
same course had been taken in regard to the Philippine Islands, and 
while I think like questions will come up, perhaps in a few years, 
perhaps not for a generation, in regard to the nations in the hemi- 
sphere south of us, for which I trust Cuba and not the Philippines 
will furnish the precedent for our conduct, yet, in my judgment, 
THERE IS NOBODY IN MASSACHUSETTS SO WELL 
FITTED, ON THE WHOLE, TO REPRESENT HER CHAR- 
ACTER AND OPINIONS, AND TO CARE FOR HER IN- 
TERESTS IN THE FUTURE, AS YOU ARE. I SHOULD 
REGARD IT AS A GREAT PUBLIC CALAMITY IF ANY 
ATTACK UPON YOU WERE TO BE SUCCESSFUL, and I 
do not think there is, at present, the slightest probability that it 
will be successful or even formidable. 

I am, faithfully and affectionately 

Yours, 

Geo. F. Hoar. 

The Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge, 

United States Senate. 

Are the citizens of this State willing to believe this statement, 
straight from the heart of Massachusetts' distinguished son, now 
dead, or are they to be led astray by phrases framed to catch the 
popular ear for selfish ends.'' 



LODGE 



A GLIMPSE OF SOME OF HIS E FFORTS 
FOR HUMANITY AND LABOR IN 



THE LAST TWO CONGRESSES 



FOSS AT LYNN 

"He has never been in sympathy with labor. IN ALL HIS 
25 YEARS AT WASHINGTON HE HAS NEVER FATHERED 
ANY LEGISLATION IN THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE. 

On the contrary, he has been the representative of the privileged in- 
terests. He has been known as such — the representatives of these 
interests have always kept him in power, and they are bis only support 
today. Every vote for Senator Lodge is a vote for predatory wealth 
and for monopolistic greed." — Foss at Lynn, December ig^ igio. 



I 



"Only one bill that I recall, bears his name.—" 

— Foss, at Provincetoxvn^ December 7, igio. 

Such statements, so often repeated, are misleading, and should 
be denied by every public-spirited citizen. 

GEO. L. BARNES, 
Main Street. South Weymouth, Mass. 



THIS LITTLE GLIMPSE 

OF HIS RECORD IS ONLY A TINY PORTION OF 
MR. LODGE'S WORK. 



59TH CONGRESS.— 1st Session. 

December 4th, 1905, to June 30, 1906. 

Some of the bills introduced in the Senate by Senator Lodge. 

S. 691. To regulate the employment of CHILD LABOR. Referred 
to Committee on Education and Labor, of which Mr. Lodge 
was not a member, reported back adversely. Action in- 
definitely postponed. Cong, Record, Pp. 7126. 

S. 695. To increase pensions of ARMY NURSES. Cong. Record, 

Pp. 150. 

S. 696. To prevent the DESECRATION OF THE U. S. FLAG. 
Cong. Record, Pp. 150. First referred to Committee on 
Judiciary, of which Mr. Lodge was not a member. Later, 
reference changed to Committee on Military Afifairs, of which 
Mr. Lodge was a member. Cong. Rec, Pp. 3716. (This bill 
was re-introduced and became a law at the next Congress.) 

S. 1027. To further REGULATE UNDESIRABLE IMMIGRA- 
TION. Pp. 221, Cong. Record. 

S. 1028. TO FURTHER REGULATE UNDESIRABLE IMMI- 
GRATION. Pp. 221, Cong. Record. 

(Both the above bills were referred to the Committee on 
Immigration, of which Mr. Lodge was a member. These 
bills were considered for some time and parts of them in- 
corporated in a new comprehensive Immigration Act, 
S. 4403, but which did not contain his Illiteracy Test pro- 
vision. Mr. Lodge on May 23rd, 1906, tacked on to this Bill 
as an amendment his Illiteracy Test provision which passed 
the Senate. This was the sixth time Mr. Lodge secured the 
passage of this Illiteracy Test through the Senate. This 
provision was stricken out in conference during the next 
session, as the result of the House having by a narrow 
majority substituted for it the appointment of an investigat- 
ing Commission to consider the question. Mr. Lodge was ap- 
pointed on this Commission, which after four years' in- 
vestigation and the expenditure of almost $1,000,000 
unanimously reported in favor of restricting the present 
enormous influx of unskilled cheap labor. Eight of the nine 



Commissioners, including Mr. Lodge, recommended the en- 
actment of the Illiteracy Test as the most feasible means of 
excluding undesirable immigration. 

S. 1029. NATURALIZATION LAW. Pp. 221, Cong. Record. Re- 
ferred to Senate Immigration Committee, of which Senator 
Lodge is a member, and which reported in June a new com- 
prehensive Naturalization Law along the lines of Senator 
Lodge's bill. The House passed a similar measure first, 
largely as a result of Congressman Gardner's efforts. The 
Senate Committee subsequently reported the House Bill 
which became a law in June, 1906. 

S. 1346. TO FIX PAY OF CUSTOMS INSPECTORS. Pp. 272, 
Cong. Record. 

S. 3420. To fix pay of Customs Inspectors. Pp. 1213, Cong. Record. 

S. 4970. TO REGULATE COMMUTATION OF UNITED STATES 
PRISONERS FOR GOOD CONDUCT. Pp. 3571, Cong. 
Rec. 

S. 5750. TO PRESERVE NIAGARA FALLS. Pp. 5363. Cong. 
Rec. (Compromise between this and H. R. 18024, became a 
law.) Pp. 9807, Cong. Rec. 

S. 6091. TO REGULATE THE LICENSING OF PLUMBERS, 
GASFITTERS, FIXTURE HANGERS, ETC., in D. of C. 
Pp. 6550, Cong. Rec. 



Remarks and speeches delivered by Senator Lodge in the 

Senate during the 1st Session of the 59th Congress. 

He spoke in favor of 

EMPLOYERS ' LIABILITY, Pp. 1743, Cong. Rec. 

IMMIGRATION, REGULATION, Pps. 7227, 7234, 7280, 7287, 7290. 
On May 23rd, 1906, Pp. 7300, Cong. Rec, when a move was 
made to weaken the Contract Labor provision, which had 
been strengthened greatly by the Senate Committee in its 
Bill, S. 4403, by allowing the importation of Contract 
Laborers purporting to come as agricultural workers. Senator 
Lodge said among other things :— "The object of the con- 
tract labor law is to shut out the importation of large bodies 
of cheap labor. I would rather see every exception wiped 

from the Statute Books ********* * 

the contract labor laws today are ineffective enough. They 
are the most valuable part of existing laws, in my judgment, 
but are sadly ineffective, owing to the difficulty of finding 
evidence, and carrying on prosecutions. If we should except 
agricultural laborers (from its provisions as proposed by 
Senators Bacon, Clay and others) we might as well abolish 
the contract labor laws altogether, in my judgment." The 

10 



amendment was defeated, but an attempt to tack it on to the 
Bill was again made in February and fought successfully by 
Senator Lodge, the Immigration Bill, S. 4403, becoming a 
law Feb. 19, 1907. 

(Senator Lodge's restriction speech of March i6th, 1896, 
U. S. S., is regarded as one of the ablest arguments ever made 
in behalf of protecting the American laboring man, whether 
native or foreign-born, from the competition of foreign cheap 
labor, by means of the reading and writing test.) 

(Another speech by Senator Lodge equally able was de- 
livered before the Boston City Club at Boston, Mass., on 
March 20th, 1908, and has been printed as Sen. Doc. No. 423, 
60th Congress, ist Ses.) 

PURE FOOD. Page 1132. 

RAILROAD RATE LEGISLATION. 

MEAT INSPECTION. Pp. 8767-8769. Cong. Rec. 



59TH CONGRESS.— 2nd Session. 

Dec. 3rd, 1906, to March 4th, 1907. 

S. 6730. TO REGULATE CHILD LABOR IN THE D. OF C. 
Pp. 53, Cong. Rec. (As noted above, provisions of Senator 
Lodge's bill together with Senator Beveridge's subsequently 
became law. Mr. Lodge was not a member of the Senate 
Committee to which his Bill had to be referred, Senator 
Beveridge being its Chairman.) 

(Senator Lodge also introduced an amendment to the 
above Child Labor Bill.) 



Some of the remarks and speeches delivered by Senator Lodge 

in the Senate, during the 2nd Session, 59th Congress. 

He spoke in favor of 

CHILD LABOR LEGISLATION, Pp. 197-199, 200-204, Cong. Rec. 

FOOD STANDARDS OR PURE FOOD, Pp. 3641-3643, Cong. Rec. 

CONTRACT LABOR LAW AND IMMIGRATION LEGISLA- 
TION, Feb. I2th to 17th, 1907. 

HOURS OF SERVICE LEGISLATION, Pps. 821, 824, 888, 990. 

For instance, in support of Senator Dolliver's contention, he 
said : — 

"I wish to ask the Senator if he noticed the statement of the 
engineer of the freight or equipment train, which ran into a 
passenger train here at Terra Cotta, just outside the city, 
causing a frightful disaster? If I remember his statement 
correctly, he had been on duty from 9 o'clock Friday morn- 

11 



ing — for a period of more than 48 hours — until the time of 
the accident. ****** He had only two periods 
for sleep of four hours each." 

Senator Lodge vot -d for sub>t'tutirg the LaFoUette 
Hours of Service Bill for the Senate Committee Bill. 



60TH CONGRESS.— 1st Session. 

Dec. 2nd, 1907, to May 31st, 1908. 

Bills introduced by Senator Lodge. 

S. 564. Child Labor. Referred to Com. on Education and Labor, of 
which Senator Lodge was not a member, and of which 
Senator Beveridge was Chairman, Pp. 2422, Cong. Rec. The 
Committee reported a new bill embodying some of Senator 
Lodge's Bill. In the vote Senator Lodge worked against 
and opposed the Nelson and Piles amendments. 

S. 4122. To establish a NATIONAL TRAINING AND INDUS- 
TRIAL INSTITUTE. 

S. 7005. TO PROMOTE INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION. 

S. 6975. TO PROVIDE INCREASED FORCE AND SALARIES IN 
THE PATENT OFFICE. 

Resolution to PRINT CERTAIN IMMIGRATION STATISTICS. 
Adopted. 



Some remarks and speeches of Senator Lodge during the 
1st Session of the 60th Congress. 

In favor of AUTOMATIC SIGNAL SERVICE, Pp. 6736, Cong. Rec. 

In favor of CHILD LABOR LEGISLATION, Pps. 5795-5799. 

In favor of LEGISLATION TO PREVENT THE DESECRATION 
OF THE AMERICAN FLAG. His Bill, S. 565, whose refer- 
ence had been transferred to a Committee on Military Affairs 
of which he was a member, was reported and passed. 
Pp. 6599, Cong. Rec. 

In favor of NATURALIZATION, Pp. 4103. 

In favor of INCREASE OF PAY FOR RAILWAY MAIL CLERKS. 
Etc., etc., etc. 

On April 9th, 1908, he failed to vote on EMPLOYEES (Govern- 
ment) LIABILITY BILL, for which he had spoken as indicated 
above, having a general pair with Senator Clay, who was in poor 
health and who had since died. As early as the 54th Congress 
Senator Lodge introduced a Bill, S. 1415, "TO REGULATE THE 
LIABILITY OF EMPLOYERS"; a bill, S. 1416, "TO PROTECT 

12 



THE WAGES OF EMPLOYEES"; S. 1417, "TO REGULATE THE 
EMPLOYMENT OF LABOR ON PUBLIC WORKS, BUILD- 
INGS AND GROUNDb." His failure to vote on April 9th, 1908, 
was due to his absence fiom Washington for a number of days at that 
time owing to the illness and death of hs sister. 

On April 17th, 1908, he voted for and had favored all along the 
passage of an ANTI-INJUNCTION BILL, S. 5732, which passed, the 
Senate, April 17th, 1908, which Senator Overman, who ofifered the 
Anti-Injunction amendment to the Railroad Bill, said was very 
drastic. His opposition to the Overman Anti-Injunction Amendment 
of Tune 2nd, 1910, did not go to its merits but was due to his unalter- 
able and FUNDAMENTAL OPPOSITION TO HYBRID, 
MONGREL LEGISLATING in that way. The amendment was not 
in the least germane and had no connection whatsoever with the sub- 
ject matter declared to be contained, which was Railroad Legislation. 
He regards such procedure as irregular, dangerous and likely to estab- 
lish a bad precedent that would result even in a minority having its 
way about legislation. His attitude summed up seems to be that there 
is just as great a NECESSITY FOR REGULARITY AND 
RELEVANCY in the matter of legislative procedure as there is in 
parliamentary practice. 



60TH CONGRESS.— 2nd Session. 

Dec. 7th, 1908, to March 4th, 1909. 

He introduced bills 

S. 8025. GRANTING THIRTY DAYS' LEAVE WITH PAY TO 
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES IN ARSENALS. Referred 
to Committee on Military Affairs. 

S 8397. To AUTHORIZE MAINTENANCE OF ACTION FOR 
CAUSING DEATH IN MARINE SERVICE, Pp. 792, 
Cong. Rec. Referred to Com., which reported it favorably. 
Debate unfinished. 

S. 8021. To PROHIBIT IMPORTATION AND USE OF OPIUM. 
Reported. Speech of Senator Lodge, Pp. I396-I399- Passed 
Senate, Pp. 1400. 



61ST CONGRESS. —2nd Session. 

Note. — It was Senator Lodge's amendment which included 

Pipe Lines in the Railroad Rate Law as Common Carriers. 

This brought for the first time the Carriers of oil 

under government control. 

NOTE. Senator Lodge reported from his Committee on Immigration 
H. R. 12315, The White Slave Traffic Act, with majority report. 
There was great opposition to this WHITE SLAVE TRAFFIC ACT, 

13 



that was drawn by certain U. S. District Attorneys, who were engaged 
in the prosecution of the traffic as a result of the Immigration Com- 
mission's investigation. The Bill was hung up in the House for weeks 
and debated at great length, finally passing. On the last day of the 
session, Senator Lodge called the Bill up and secured its passage. 
Paffes Sq^q, q=;o7. It is Public Statute, No. 886, and THE ONLY 
REALLY SCIENTIFICALLY DRAWN WHITE SLAVE LAW 
THAT HAS PASSED CONGRESS. 

NOTE Senator Lodge worked for the Bill which made COMMON 
CARRIERS, that is, railroads, LIABLE TO EMPLOYEES FOR 
CERTAIN INJURIES. 

NOTE. Senator Lodge favored and WORKED FOR THE BILL, 
H. R. 20310, EXTENDING THE LIABILITY OF COMMON CAR- 
RIERS, that is, railroads. He voted for H. R. 17263. April i, 1910, 
curing the defect of survival of right of action. Cong. Rec, Pp. 4204. 
Senitor Lodge was ill at home the day the HUGHES AMEND- 
MENT was voted upon and under a doctor's care, and did not know it 
was coming up. June 2, 1910. The Congressional Record shows he 
was ABSENT BUT PAIRED. 



NOTES IN GENERAL. 

Senator Lodge, when a member of the House, wrote the first 
magazine article that appeared in favor of UNIFORM BRAKES, 
PATENT AUTOMATIC COUPLERS, ETC. It was entitled: "A 
Perilous Business and Its Remedy," and is to be found in the North 
American for February, 1892. 

On July 2, 1894, he SECURED THE PASSAGE OF HIS BILL 
TO REMOVE THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN SO FAR 
AS IT PREVENTED LABORERS, MECHANICS, etc., from re- 
covering under the Eight Hour Law. 

The following quotation is an extract from a speech which 
he delivered in New York City, December 22nd, 1884, and repre- 
sents the stand which he has consistently taken throughout his long 
career as a public servant : 

"The destiny of the Republic is in the welfare of its working 
men and women. We cannot push their troubles and cares 
into the background, and trust that all will come right in the 
end. Let us look to it that differences and inequalities of 
conditions do not widen into ruin. It is most true that these 
difterences cannot be rooted out, but they can be modified, 
and a great deal can be done to secure to every man the share 
of well-being and happiness to which his honesty, thrift and 
ability entitle him. Legislation cannot change humanity nor 
alter the decrees of nature, but it can help the solution of 
these grave problems. 

"Practical measures are plentiful enough, the hours of 
labor; emigration from our overcrowded cities to the lands 
of the West; economical and energetic municipal govern- 
ments ; proper building laws ; the rigid prevention of adul- 

14 



teration of the great staples of food; wise regulation of the 
railroads and other great corporations ; the extirpation of race 
and class in politics ; above all, every effort to secure to labor 
its fair and full share of the profits earned by the combina- 
tion of labor and capital. Here are matters of great pith and 
moment, more important, more essential, more pressing, than 
any others. They must be met; they cannot be shirked or 
evaded." 
In Senator Lodge's speech on the Restriction of Immigration, 

March i6th, 1896, in the Senate of the United States, among other 

things, he said : — 

"I have said enough to show what the effects of this Bill 
(which contained the Illiteracy Test) would be, and that if 
enacted into law it would be fair in its operation and highly 
beneficial in its results. It now remains for me to discuss the 
second and larger question, as to the advisability of restrict- 
ing Immigration at all. There is no one thing which does so 
much to bring about a reduction of wages and to injure the 
American wage-earner as the unlimited introduction of cheap 
foreign labor through unrestricted immigration. Statistics 
show that the change in the character of our immigration has 
been accompanied by a corresponding decline in its quality. 
The number of skilled mechanics and of the persons trained 
to some occupation or pursuit has fallen off, while the num- 
ber of those without occupation or training, that is, who are 
totally unskilled, has risen in our recent immigration to enor- 
mous proportions. This low, unskilled labor is the most 
deadly enemy of the American wage-earner, and does more 
than anything else towards lowering his wages and forcing 
down his standard of living. An attempt was made,_with the 
general assent of both political parties, to meet this crying 
evil by the passage of what are known as the Contract Labor 
Laws. That legislation was excellent in intention, but has 
proved of but little value in practice. It has checked to a 
certain extent the introduction of cheap, low-class labor in 
large masses into the United States. It has made it a little 
more difficult for such labor to come here; but the labor of 
this class continues to come, even if not in the same way, and 
the total amount of it has not been materially reduced. Even 
if the Contract Labor Laws were enforced intelligently and 
thoroughly there is no reason to suppose that they would 
have any adequate effect in checking the evil which they were 
designed to stop. It is perfectly clear, after the experience of ^ 

several years, that the only relief which can come to the J 

American wage-earner from the competition of low-class im- 
migrant labor must be by general laws restricting the total 
amount of immigration, and framed in such a way as to affect 
most strongly those elements of the immigration which fur- 
nish the low, unskilled and ignorant foreign labor. ^ ^ 

"It is not necessary to enter further into a discussion of ■^■ 

the economic side of the general policy o' restricting im- 
migration. In this direction the argument is unanswerable. 

16 



If we have any regard for the welfare, the wages, or the 
standard of life of American workingmen, we should take im- 
mediate steps to restrict foreign immigration. There is an 
appalling danger to the American wage-earner from the flood 
of low, unskilled, ignorant, foreign labor which has poured 
into the country for some years past, and which not only 
takes lower wages but accepts a standard of life and living 
so low that the American workingman cannot compete with 
it." 

Extract from the Report (Dec. 5th, 1910, 40 Vols.) of the U. S. 
Immigration Commission, of which Senator Lodge was a member. 

"The investigations of the Commission show an over- 
supply of unskilled labor in basic industries. ***** 
as a whole, and therefore demand legislation which will at the 
present time restrict the further admission of such unskilled 
labor." 

"As far as possible, the aliens excluded should be those 
^■^Q * * * * come merely to save enough by the adop- 
tion, if necessary, of low standards of living, to return per- 
manently to their home country. * * * * A majority of 
the Commission favor the reading and writing test as the 
most feasible single method of restricting undesirable im- 
migration. The Commission as a whole recommends restric- 
tion as demanded by economic, moral and social considera- 
tions, furnishes in its report reasons for such restriction, and 
points out methods by which Congress can obtain the desired 
results if its judgment coincides with that of the Commis- 
sion." 

(Of the nine members, only one, Congressman Bennet, 
wrote a dissenting opinion. Congressman John L. Burnett 
(Dem.) says that without Senator Lodge's strong stand for 
specific measures the report would have said nothing about a 
majority favoring the illiteracy test.) 



16 



A SHORT REVIEW OF LODGE'S WORK. 

Senator Henry Cabot Lodge has steadily fulfilled the duties of his 
office since his election in 1893 and in that time he has only once made a 
speech in his own behalf. 

Certain critics have attempted, by insinuation rather than statements 
of fact, to convey an impression that Mr. Lodge in some way has not 
represented the whole people of Massachusetts, but that he has been 
allied with powerful financial interests. 

These critics can find neither motive for such violation of his duty 
nor record of failure frankly and progressively to meet any great public 
issue. 

Mr. Lodge has possessed an ample inherited fortune which has re- 
lieved him from temptation to make money either honestly or dishonest- 
ly. His fortune has been so invested in real estate and stable securities 
that he has never been under any necessity of exerting himself to pro- 
tect it. He has only to a very shght extent ever been a personal bene- 
ficiary of the tariff. He holds absolutely no business directorate. He 
never speculates. His whole cast of mind is foreign to the game oi 
business deals and dickers. These do not interest him. Business in- 
terests him only as it touches the governmental and constitutional ques- 
tions of which he has been a life-long student. No motive for his serv- 
ing as the tool of a group of bankers or speculators has ever been 
shown. 

Senator Lodge has supported and voted for many measures in the 
public interest that were strenuously opposed by great financial interests. 
He has avoided needlessly jeopardizing the stability of our institutions by 
mere agitation. 

Questions of controlling and increasing the efficiency of the rail- 
roads are just now under discussion. Senator Lodge has been a fore- 
most figure in the fight for fair treatment of all shippers. When the 
rate regulation contest was on and the railroads of the country, almost 
without exception, united to raise a big publicity fund to discredit Presi- 
dent Roosevelt, Senator Lodge was a staunch supporter of the adminis- 
tration. He had previously voted for the Elkins bill which put an end to 
open rebating, the greatest evil in our transportation system. He voted 
for and took an active part in the Senate in passing the two great rail- 
road rate bills which passed under the administrations of President 
Roosevelt and President Taft. Of the then two great railroad interests 
of New England, one (the Boston & Maine), wa& actively hostile to the 
programme of regulation. The otlier (the New Haven) was neutral and 
indififerent. No other New England Senator or Representative took a 
more positive stand than Senator Lodge on the popular side of this 
issue. Today, some of the railroad men who opposed rate regulation 
admit that the plan was for their good as well as that of the public. 
Senator Lodge was also personally responsible for making common car- 
riers of the interstate pipe lines — a piece of legislation which was not 
exactly in the interest of the Standard Oil Company. ^ . 

Certain vested interests, some of them not unrepresented in Massa- 
chusetts, were opposed to the Pure Food bill. Senator Lodge was not of 

17 



tlie committee which reported this bill, but he supported it heartily and 
introduced an important amendment providing for the statement on the 
label of the amount of opium or alcohol in any medical preparation. At 
the last session of Congress he introduced a bill, upon which action may 
be taken shortly, for the limitation of the time during which articles of 
food may be kept in cold storage — unlimited time being one of the 
methods of maintaining an artificial level of prices. This is the only 
legislation thus far proposed for the lowering of prices abnormally or 
artificially advanced. 

The child labor evil is one of the greatest evils in American life. 
Senator Lodge has advocated child labor legislation on every possible 
occasion and especially exerted himself for the passage of the bill to 
regulate child labor in the District of Columbia. 

Mr. Lodge's interest in the movement for an Appalachian mountain 
forest reserve is one of the many examples of his consistent support of all 
measures looking toward the conservation of our national resources, our 
forests, our minerals and water powers. Western opposition to the 
eastern forest reserve has been encountered in the House of Representa- 
tives, but some measure creating it should pass before long. 

Mr. Lodge voted for the corporation tax. which is in efifect an income 
tax, because he felt that it was a fair means of raising revenue from 
those best able to bear the burden. 

He voted to report from his committee the income tax resolution by 
which the question of the necessary constitutional amendment was left 
to the different States to decide. At the time of the passage of this 
resolution through the Senate he was compelled to be absent, but he was 
paired in its favor. He holds that inheritances should be taxed uniformly 
and by the United States, a portion of the taxation thus raised to be 
returned, if necessary, to the State governments. 

On account of his long term of service, his experience and the 
favor of his colleagues in the Senate, Mr. Lodge is in a position to serve 
the State as no new Senator could serve it. He has been chairman of the 
Committee on the Philippines for many years. For fourteen years he has 
served on the Committee on Foreign Relations, on which he now ranks 
third, ranked only by Senators Cullom and Frye. 

These committee places and this position in the Senate are to be 
obtained only by length and quality of service. They mean at least that 
Massachusetts has these positions and that Senator Lodge must possess 
the confidence of his colleagues in the Senate. 

Some critics have indicated that Senator Lodge's services have more 
often been of a national than of a local character. As a matter of fact, 
he has done many things directly for the benefit of Massachusetts. He 
has been interested in securing the appropriation of $7,000,000 in the 
past ten years for the improvement of Boston harbor, a work which is 
proving a very great advantage to the expanding the over-seas commerce 
of the port. He has looked after the installation of new lighthouses and 
lightships on the New England coast, to the great benefit of coastwise 
and trans-Atlantic navigation. The new custom house and the ap- 
praisers' new stores in Boston have had his attention, as have the needs 
of Charlestown Navy Yard, which gives employment to many men and 
helps to circulate a great deal of money in the neighborhood. Gloucester. 
Provincetown and other fisheries centres of this section have had the 
l)enefi't of Senator Lodge's special services as a member of the Committee 

18 



on Foreign Relations. Recently he has been concerned in the move- 
ment for international regulation of the use of beam-trawlers in the fish- 
eries — some form of which agreement will soon be absolutely necessary 
if the ocean depths are to be preserved from depletion. 

Senator Lodge was largely instrumental in placing a Massachusetts 
man, Mr. W. Cameron Forbes, as insular governor of the Philippines. 
He has naturally rejoiced in the great success of Mr. Forbes' adminis- 
tration. His own connection with the problems of these island depen- 
dencies has, of course, been very intimate. With Mr. Root and the 
Secretary for War, he drafted the organic act for their government and 
carried it through the Senate after seven weeks of debate. That act, 
which definitely established a system of government for more than eight 
million people, has worked so well that only minor amendments have 
been necessary. Under it the Filipinos have been steadily advancing to- 
ward a condition in which self-government may be possible. 

On the very important subject of immigration a report has recently 
been made from the commission of investigation of which Senator 
Lodge is a member.' This report handles in a masterly manner the 
whole question of immigration. It recommends fundamental changes 
in the law which, when adopted, will radically reduce the influx of cheap 
European labor which has been such a potent factor in depressing the 
American wage scale. This report will be a logical complement of the 
work on the senatorial committee on immigration of which Senator 
Lodge was at one time chairman and of which he has always been a 
member. A very valuable previous service of this committee has been 
the regulation of air space on immigrant ships with a view to preventing 
the custom of huddling steerage passengers into cramped and unsanitary 
quarters. 

Massachusetts manufacturers are vitally concerned in the improve- 
ment of the American consular service. Senator Lodge has been one of 
the prominent figures in that movement. Taking up the efifort begun by 
Senator Morgan of Alabama he reported a bill for consular reform in 
five successive sessions. Finally, with the active support of chambers of 
commerce throughout the country, and of the State department, he suc- 
ceeded in passing a bill which bore his name, which graded the consular 
service for the first time, and for the first time placed it upon a business 
basis. This law, supplemented by departmental regulations, has taken 
the consular service right out of politics, has greatly improved its char- 
acter, and made the reports, investigations and other activities of its 
employees more beneficial to American manufacturers and exporters than 
ever before in the history of the United States. 

Massachusetts and New England have often been urged to cultivate 
better relations with the Dominion of Canada, now growing rapidly in 
political and commercial importance. Senator Lodge has always and £ 

consistently favored reciprocity with Canada, but he has never attempted 1 

to deceive people into a supposition that Canadians are as yet anxious 
for reciprocity. He has recognized that the amicable sentiment implied 
in such an arrangement still needs to be cultivated, and for that reason 
be has labored for many years to improve our treaty relations and other j-' 

relations with the Dominion. He had his share in the passage of the 
treaties which settled the Alaskan boundary, the lake fisheries, the inter- 
national waterways, the international boundaries, and the Newfoundland 
fisheries. The removal of these questions from the domain of possible 



dispute has made the relations of the United States with Canada better 
than they ever have been before and greatly improved the prospect of 
obtaining trade reciprocity. At the same time no one who is at all 
familiar with conditions in Canada today can doubt that something more 
than the mere special pleading of a governor or two in New England will 
be necessary to create a really strong reciprocity sentiment across the 
border. 

Senator Lodge's position regarding the tariff bill of 1900 needs no 
defense. He has served on the finance committee of the Senate for only 
two years, but during those two years his committee was charged with 
the work of considering and reporting this much discussed measure. As 
a Republican and protectionist, believing that the measure of protection 
should be the difference in the cost of production between this country 
and in foreign countries, he voted for the Payne-Aldrich bill, not be- 
cause it was perfect, but because it was a better bill, in his opinion, than 
that which it superseded, and because he was unwilling, whatever the 
defects of the bill, to vote against reduction in the duties on lumber, 
iron ore, scrap iron, the great majority of food products, or against the 
improvement in rates and classifications of many important schedules. 
He would have been especially unwilling to vote against the bill and to 
postpone for four years the establishment of a customs court and a 
maximum and minimum provision. He would have been especially loath 
to seem to vote against a tariff board, for an experience of five tariff re- 
visions has convinced him that wholesale and unscientific revisions, 
whether by one party or the other, along lines heretofore followed, ought 
no longer to be permitted. For this reason he regarded the tariff board 
provision as the most important reform ever begun in any tariff bill. 
It is well remembered that in his speech, made in Somerville last June, 
Senator Lodge advocated the policy of having all future revisions made 
only upon information furnished by a board of disinterested specialists. 
His present opposition to any wholesale revision in accordance with old 
methods by either Republicans or Democrats is certainly in line with ad- 
vanced public opinion on the tariff question. He has said recently that 
he wishes to see the schedules dealt with as rapidly as possible on the 
reports made by the tariff board, as they are furnished to Congress. 

Senator Lodge's record shows him to be so much of a progressive 
that, by comparison with certain mugwump and reactionary gentlemen 
whose names have been suggested in connection with the senatorship, he 
might appear to be almost a wild radical. As a matter of fact, however, 
his position has been more to be compared with that of the great liberal 
statesmen of Great Britain. He has stood for progressive re- 
adaptation of the forms of constitutional government to modern condi- 
tions. He has believed in sane progress, but not in violent or revolu- 
tionary methods, holding that the reactionary and the revolutionist stand 
close together, each making the other inevitable. 



2Q 



WHITE'S LETTER CONCERNING THE FOSS 
ATTACK AT PROVINCETOWN. 

Boston, Dec. ioth, 1910. 
Gov.-Elect Eugene N. Foss, 

34 Oliver Street, 

Boston, Mass. 
Dear Sir : — 

It will be remembered that I went to Provincetown and listened to 
your attacks directed against Senator Henry Cabot Lodge. I listened in- 
tently to every word you said. Upon analysis I find your whole speech is 
riddled with statements not founded on fact. You as governor-elect of 
this State, assuming the role of "messenger of the people," ought to be 
at least more careful of your statements, in my judgment. 

First. You stated that "The Mindoro Development Company of 
New Jersey, whose authorization zvas defended by Mr. Lodge, is en- 
gaged in outrageous exploitation of the public lands for the benefit of the 
Sugar Trust magnates, etc." 

Mr. Foss, I defy you to show whenever Mr. Lodge defended the 
authorization of the Mindoro Company ! You know, or you ought to 
know, that every question relating to this Company, or any other Philip- 
pine Development Company, has never come before the Senate Com- 
mittee of the Philippines, or before the United States Senate ! You know 
that questions dealing with public lands or any other lands in the Philip- 
pines are under control of the Philippine Government, and the Govern- 
ment at Washington has had nothing to do with them since the Philip- 
pine Government was organized in 1902 ! Mr. Foss, I defy you to deny 
the truth of this statement ; and I demand as one authorized to vote for a 
United States Senator to explain this statement to the people, in the 
name of fair play ! 

Second. You said that Mr. Lodge has been silent on the various ^^ 

questions raised by you. This is not so. He has been silent only on C 

■questions which dealt with matters which were none of his business, but 
were the business of the Massachusetts Legislature. 

Categorically, in part at least, you stated as follows : 

(a) "On the stump I repeatedly asked him if he favored an honest r 

revision of the tariff downward, either as a whole or (as President Taft 
suggests) schedule by schedule. He is silent." 

Mr. Foss, you either know, or you ought to know, that he is, with 
President Taft. in favor of amending the tariff schedule by schedule. I 

21 



refer you to his speech in Somerville, June 28, 1910, and his speech in 
Worcester, October 29, 1910. 

(b) You stated: "I asked him if he favored removing the duties 
on all food products, whether Canada or not. He is silent." 

Here is the truth : Senator Lodge has dealt with this question time 
and time again, and pointed out distinctly that if the producers of food 
products, i. e., the great agricultural states, would consent, it would be 
done at once ! He also stated if they did not consent it could 
not be done; and if it was forced through the National Con- 
gress against their will it would result in the removal of all protec- 
tive duties on all manufactured products. You know perfectly well it is 
impossible to have protection for industries and free trade for the 
farmers. It must be protection for all or free trade for all. You know, 
or you ought to know that to take off the duty on Canadian food products 
without an equivalent would compel taking off the duties of the food 
products of all countries under the "most favored nation clause" in over 
thirty treaties which the United States has with other countries. Why 
don't you tell the public about these treaties instead of "harping" upon 
reciprocity ? 

(c) You say: "I asked him if he favored free raw materials for 
New England industries. He is silent." 

This is not so ! Time and time again Senator Lodge has stated : "No 
one can define raw materials." Why don't you define them, Mr. Foss? 
H it means leather, — Senator Lodge voted for the reduction on leather, 
from 20% to 15%, 10% to 5%, when he voted for Payne law. If it 
means raw cotton, — you know better than any man in Massachusetts 
that cotton is already free. If it means coal (and you are close to the coal 
business), — you know that anthracite coal is free, and furthermore 
Senator Lodge voted for a reduction on bituminous coal from 67c to 45c 
per ton in the Payne Law. Why don't you say so? If it means hides, — 
he did more for free hides than any member of the House or Senate. 
Do you deny this, Mr. Foss? If it means iron ore, — he voted for a 
decrease of duty from 40c per ton to 15c per ton. Why don't you tell the 
public these facts ? Why don't you tell them that one man's raw material 
is another man's finished product? Do you call this the silence which 
you talked about in Provincetown? 

(d) You stated: "I asked him if he favored reducing our duties 
on manufactured products to a level with those of Canada as a proof of 
our good faith for reciprocity. He is silent." 

Now if this question of yours means anything at all, it is evident 
on its face that you have taken little or no time to study this matter, 
or you would be familiar with what is known as the "most favored 
nation" clause in international treaties. Any member of Congress could 
have informed you, had you asked, that practically all great nations agree 

22 



with each other by treaty not to charge different rates of duty to differ- 
ent nations! You know, Mr. Foss, the United States has treaties with 
over thirty different nations under which each nation agrees to charge 
the same rate of duty to the humblest of nations that it charges to the 
most favored nation. It is permitted by International Law to make spe- 
cial bargains known as Reciprocity Treaties ; and you know that Senator 
Lodge has always favored a Reciprocity Treaty with Canada, and has 
stated so over and over again for twenty years! See his Northampton 
speech of Oct. 25th, 1910, and his Worcester speech Oct. 29th, 1910, to 
refresh your memory ! 

On the stump with you at Provincetown, and elsewhere, is Senator 
Nason. While I am informed you pay for halls and literature and other 
expenses, Senator Nason argues on the same platform with you for the 
election of Hon. Butler Ames in place of Senator Lodge. Now 1 ask 
you : 

First. Do you believe, or advocate, the candidacy of Mr. Ames? 
If you do not, why do you hire halls for others to advocate his can- 
didacy? 

Second. Will you or will you not inform the public definitely, 
whether or not you would accept the nomination for United States 
Senator offered you by your party? 

Definite and direct statements in reply will be appreciated. 

Yours truly, 

NORMAN H. WHITE, 

105 Gardner Road, 

Brookline, 

Mass. 

In a published statement, Mr. Foss has declined to answer 
this letter I 



^ 



23 




ABOUT 



"The 105 YEA and NAY Votes" 



OF 



Senator 



Henry Cabot Lodge 



ON THE 



i 



PAYNE BILL 



THESE FACTS 

ARE FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL 
RECORD, AND SHOW THE TRUTH 
REGARDING THE FOSS CIRCULAR 



FOSS AT PROVINCETOWN 

"On 105 yea and nay votes, Senator Lodge voted for 22 

ncreases of duties, against 51 amendments to lower duties, 

ind was not recorded on 22 yea and nay votes. IN NO 

NSTANCE DID HE VOTE FOR A REDUCTION 

OF DUTIES, BUT DID VOTE AGAINST A TAX 

ON TEA." 

ABOVE STATEMENT 
IFROM CIRCULAR ISSUED AND DISTRIBUTED AT 

FOSS' MEETINGS 



"// is not enough to speak ^ but to speak true J' 

SENATOR LODGE VOTED FOR OVER 

REDUCTIONS BELOW THE EXISTING 
DINGLEY LAW. 



650 



SENATOR LODGE VOTED FOR 

AMENDMENTS REDUCING RATES IN PAYNE 
BILL AS IT PASSED THE HOUSE 



35 



SEE NEXT PAGE FOR LIST 

27 



AFTER THE TARIFF BILL passed the HOUSE 

LODGE VOTED IN FAVOR 

OF 350FFERED AMENDMENTS, REDUCING rate:, 
IN THE PAYNE BILL ! 

READ THE ARTICLES AFFECTED ENUMERATED BELOW i 



MR, FOSS DOES NOT MENTION 
THESE THIRTY-FIVE 



SEE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 



I. 

2. 


Sulphate of Copper 
Dyes 


19. 

20. 


Wire 

Certain kinds of Lumbal 


3- 


Copperas 


21. 


Willow Furniture 


4- 
5- 


Quebracho 
Cutch 


22. 

23- 


Blinds 
Condensed Milk 


6. 


Gelatine 


24. 


Beets 


7- 


Glue 


25- 


Peas 


8. 


Ultramarine 


26. 


Seeds 


9- 


Paris Green 


27. 


Coca 


lO. 

II. 

12. 


Asphaltum 

Glass 

Field Glasses 


28. 
29. 
30. 


Salt 

Pepper 

Mustard 


13- 

14. 


Onyx 

Marble 


31- 

32. 


Certain cheap Silks 
Certain kinds of Paper 


15- 
16. 

17- 

18. 


Iron 
Anchors 
Steel 
Shot 


33- 
34- 
35- 


Hat materials 

Matches 

Gloves, (goat, kid or leather) 



DID MR. FOSS FORGET THESE 35 AMENDMENTS.? 

THEY WERE REPORTED BY SENATOR LODGE'S 
COMMITTEE! 

REPUBLICANS (NEARLY ALL) VOTED FOR THESE 35. 

DEMOCRATS (NEARLY ALL) VOTED FOR THESE 35. 

FOSS HAS NOT SHOWN LODGE'S RECORD. * 

HE DOES NOT MENTION EVERYTHING ! 

JUST A LITTLE— THAT'S ALL 

28 



HERE IS A SAMPLE 

The Foss circular states the bald fact that on " June 17, 1910, 
yOdge voted against Bacon's amendment reduction on common win- 
ow glass." 

IT DOES NOT STATE that the existing duty under the 
)iiigley Law was i 3-8 cents per pound, and that MR. LODGE'S 
:OMMITTEE ON FINANCE HAD ALREADY REDUCED 
T TO I 1-8 CENTS PER POUND when Bacon offered his 
inendment. 

He does not state BACON'S AMENDMENT WAS A STILL 
■URTHER REDUCTION to i cent per pound. No ! 

YOU ARE LEFT TO GUESS REAL FACTS 



BUT THAT IS NOT ALL 

The Foss circular says "LODGE WAS NOT RECORDED 
3N 22 YEA AND NAY VOTES. 

Here are the facts : 

It is the custom for each U. S. Senator to have a permanent pair, 
iko that fullest vote on each question may be obtained. If either sen- 
ator in a pair is absent, the other senator refrains from voting, unless 
1 special announcement to the contrary is made, the Republican 
senator is^reckoned as voting with the Republican majority of the 
Committee, and the Democratic senator is reckoned as voting with 
ihe Democratic minority of the Committee. 

1 Senator Lodge's permanent pair was Senator Clay. Near the 
2nd of the session SENATOR CLAY WAS SO ILL HE WAS 
FREQUENTLY ABSENT. He has since died. In analyzing Sena- 
itor Lodge's votes, unless announcement was made to the contrary, 
SENATOR LODGE, it is safe to say, VOTED WITH HIS 
.COMMITTEE. 

I The ONLY FAIR JUDGMENT of a senator's vote on a Tariff 
Bill is his VOTE ON THE COMPLETED BILL. PROPOSED 
AMENDMENTS REJECTED, WERE, IN MANY CASES, 
SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED, after the Senate Committee on 
Finance had had opportunity to examine them. 

29 



THE "105 VOTES" 



3 TIMES Senator Lodge voted for INCREASE over existing law. 

24 TIMES Senator Lodge voted for REDUCTION from existing 
law. 

\ TIMES the effect of Senator Lodge's vote was to leave existing 
LAW UNCHANGED 

53 TIMES Senator Lodge's votes were REPETITIONS OR had 
NO REFERENCE TO DUTY RATES, 



105 TOTAL. In spite of this, the Foss circular says : 



"Scan this record carefully and see how Senator Lodge voted 
in every instance, both on bill and amendment, against any prop- 
osition to lower the cost of living to the people, and how he voted 
to increase it on every suggestion of special privilege." — Foss 
circular distributed at Provincetown and elsewhere ! 



IS THIS STATEMENT FAIR? 



SUMMARY OF FACTS 

REGARDING THE PAYNE BILL 

DUTIES WERE DECREASED ON ARTICLES WHOSE 
YEARLY CONSUMPTION IS $4,951,878,575. 

DUTIES WERE INCREASED ON ARTICLES WHOSE 
YEARLY CONSUMPTION is $878,756,074. Thus for ONE DOL- 
LAR INCREASE, the Payne Bill made FIVE DOLLARS DE- 
CEASE. Most increases were on LUXURIES, SPIRITS, WINES, 
SILKS, etc. 

30 



HERE ARE THE FACTS 



No. I. May 5, 1909. " Senator Lodge voted for RAISING DUTY 
( over the House Bill ) on Orange Mineral from 2 7-8 to 
3 3-8 per pound." — I^oss Circular. 

The existing law ( Dingley Law) was a duty of 

3 3-8 cents per pound. The Paine Law as it 

was passed by the House placed it at 2 7-8 cents 

Reduction from per pound. Subsequently the Senate Committee 

Dingley Law ! recommended the maintenance of the old rate 

3 3-8c to 3 1-4 ^i^^ Senator Lodge voted with the Committee. 

Afterwards he voted (August 5th, 1909) for the 

Conference Report REDUCING THE DUTY 

to 3 1-4 cents per pound. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



( May 7th, 1909 ) "Senator Lodge VOTED AGAINST 

Nos. 2, 3, 4-] May loth, 1909 )- REDUCTIONS on lead products." 

( May loth, 1909 ) — Poss Circular. 

These were Amend- The effect of these votes was to retain the exist- 

ments Hostile to the jng duties of i 1-2 cents and 2 1-8 cents per 

House Bill. Lodge ^^^^ 

Voted to Keep Exist- ^ 

ing Duties. NO CHANGE FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



.j^ , I May nth, 1909 I "Senator Lodge voted against reduc- 

5, I ^^y nth, 1909 S tions on ciOQ^^xy."— -Foss Circular . 

EVERY PROGRESSIVE EXCEPT SENA- 
TOR LAFOLLETTE ALSO VOTED 
AGAINST THE FIRST AMENDMENT. 
Lodge Maintained EVERY PROGRESSIVE EXCEPT THREE 
Existing Law VOTED AGAINST THE SECOND AMEND- 

MENT. The effect of these votes was to retain 
the existing duties on all except Rockingham 
Decorated Earthenware. This was reduced. 
REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 
31 



No. 7. May 13th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted for duty of 25 cents 
a ton on iron ore." — J^oss Circular. 



Is this a fair 
Statement? 



The EXISTING RATE WAS 40 CENTS 
PER TON. Subsequently Senator Lodge voted 
for the Conference Report PROVIDING FOR 
15 CENTS PER TON. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGEEY LAW. 



No. 8. 



Is This Against 
Reduction ? 



May 14th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against reduction 
on round iron." — Foss Circular. 

The existing rate was 8-10 of a cent per pound. 
The bill reported to the Senate had already re 
duced it to 6-10 of a cent per pound. SENATOR 
LODGE'S VOTE WAS AGAINST A PRO- 
POSAL TO REDUCE IT FURTHER to 5-10 
of a cent per pound. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 9. May 14th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against free chains, 
etc." — Foss Circular. 



Chains Reduced. 
Every Progressive 
Opposed to Foss' 
Views 



THIS AMENDMENT was OPPOSED BY 
EVERY PROGRESSIVE and was DEFEAT- 
ED BY A VOTE OF 52 TO 22. The duty 
on iron and steel chains, etc., was reduced from 
I 1-8 cents per pound, under the Dingley Law, 
to 7-8C per pound. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 10. May i8th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against bi-partisan 
investigation of prices." — Foss Circular. 

This resolution was unnecessary, inasmuch as 
a TARIFF BOARD WAS PROVIDED PRE- 
CISELY FOR THAT PURPOSE. 



What Was The 

Use? 



Nos. II, 12, 13 



Lodge Believes in 
Fair Protection 



May i8th, 1909. ) "Senator Lodge voted against re- 
ductions on razors and knives." 
— Foss Circular. 

The duty on knives was unchanged in the Payne 
Law. The DUTY ON RAZORS WAS IN- 
CREASED about one-half IN CONSE- 
QUENCE OF EVIDENCE from manufac- 
turers THAT FOREIGN COMPETITION 
WAS DESTROYING their BUSINESS. 
INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 



32 



No. 14. May i8th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted for increase of 
duty (over the House Bill) on umbrella ribs and stretch- 
ers." — ^6>^.v Circular. 



Is This "For 
Increase"? 



The Senate Committee on Finance first pro- 
posed a reduction on these articles ; BUT 
FI^AIvLY VOTED FOR THE RESTORA- 
TION OF EXISTING RATES. 

NO CHANGE FROM DINGLEY EAW. 



Nos, 15, 16, 17 



Is This "Against 
Reduction"? 



Mo fi. ^ "SENATOR LODGE VOTED 

May 19th, 1909 I AGAINST REDUCTION of 

,, ,, ,, I duty on linotype machines and 
J printing presses." 

These articles came in at 45 per cent under ex- 
isting law. THE SENATE HAD ALREADY 
REDUCED THE RATE TO 30 PER CENT. 
Senator LODGE'S VOTE WAS cast 
AGAINST a FURTHER REDUCTION. 
REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 18. May 19th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against amend- 
ment defining meaning of metal products." 

— Foss Circular. 



Does Mr. Foss 
Explain the Effect? 



It was IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE 
WHAT THE EFFECT of THE NEW 
DEFINITION WOULD BE. 



No. 19. May 20th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against amend- 
ment reducing duty on Quebracho from 1-2 cent per 
pound to 1-4 cent per pound." — Foss Circular. 

The existing law provided for 1-2 cent per pound 
on Quebracho. The House increased the duty 
to 7-8 cents per pound on the highest grade of 
Quebracho. Senator Lodge secured the restora- 
tion of the OLD RATE OF 1-2 cent, but voted 
against further reduction. 

Subsequently a compromise between Senate 
and House was reached and 3-4 CENT A 
POUND WAS IMPOSED ON THE BEST 
QUEBRACHO. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 
.33 



Increase of l-4c per 
Pound on Best 
Quebracho I Do 
You Know what 
Quebracho is? 



No. 20. May 2oth, 1909. "Senator LODGE VOTED FOR COM- 
MITTEE AMENDMENT INCREASING DUTY 
over the House Bill on White Lead from 2 3-8 cents per 
pound to 2 3-4. cents per pound." — -Foss Circ7ilar. 

Under EXISTING LAW the duty WAS 2 7-8 
Another Instance of cents per pound. The House made it 2 3-8 cents 
a Foss "Increase" per pound. The Senate Committee favored 2 3-4 
a Final Decrease cents per pound. Finally a compromise, for which 

2 r-8c to 2 l-2c! Senator LODGE VOTED, was reached, impos- 
ing A DUTY OF 2 1-2 CENTS PER POUND. 
REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 21. May 20th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted for Committee 
Amendment, increasing duty over the House Bill on 
Chromate of Potash from i 1-2 cents to 2 1-4 cents per 
pound." — T'^oss Circular. 

Under existing law THE DUTY WAS 3 
Reduction from CENTS PER POUND. The Tariff Bill as it 

3C to 2 I-4c. passed the House cut it to i 1-2 cents per pound. 

The Senate Committee voted to increase this to 

2 1-4 cents per pound. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 22. Ma}^ 2ist, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted for increase of duty 
on electric carbons by 45 per cent." — Foss Circular. 

Under the Dingley Law the DUTY WAS 90 
CENTS PER 100 CARBONS. 

The PAYNE LAW MADE THE DUTY an 
average of 50 CENTS PER 100 FEET OF 
CARBON. 

This was an apparent increase, and yet NOT 
Not a Real Increase A REAL INCREASE OVER the intent of the 
Dingley Law. At the time the Dingley Law 
was passed imported carbons were of uniform 
length. The German manufacturers proceeded 
to lengthen their carbons to three times their 
original size, continuing to pay only 90 cents 
duty per 100 carbons. It was to meet this 
evasion of the tax that the duty was changed. 
APPARENT BUT NOT REAL INCREASE 
OVER DINGLEY LAW. 

34 



No. 23. May 24th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against free lum- 
ber and building materials." — I^oss Circular. 



Duty on Lumber 
Reduced. See 
No. 62 of this 
Pamphlet 



This amendment was defeated by 64 to 13, 
EVERY PROGRESSIVE AND 9 DEMO- 
CRATS VOTING AGAINST IT. The duty 
on lumber and building materials was much 
reduced by the Payne Law, as will be shown 
under STATEMENT No. 62. 



No. 24. May 24th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against amend- 
ment for reduction of duty on Lumber to $1 per thou- 
sand feet." — I^oss Circular. 



A Misstatement 
See No. 62 of this 
Pamphlet 



This amendment is wrongly stated. It provided 
for a series of different rates from $1 to $2 on 
different kinds of lumber. These rates were 
substantially adopted later on. Nine Democrats 
joined with the Republicans in voting against 
this amendment. 

For reductions in lumber schedule, see State- 
ment No. 62. 



No. 25 
No. 26 



May 27th, 1909 



Senator Lodge VOTED AGAINST 
amendments REDUCING THE DUTY 
ON S^JGA^r—I'^oss Circular. 



Be Fair Mr. Foss 
This Was Raw 
Sugar! Was This 
in Favor of the 
Trust ? Was Not 
Refined Sugar Re- 
duced? Was This 
Against Reduction 
on Sugar? 



THE Foss circular fails to state that THE 
SUGAR referred to WAS RAW SUGAR 
ONLY, NOT THE REFINED PRODUCT 
WHICH IS MADE BY THE SUGAR 
TRUST. If THE TRUST had any interest in 
the matter at all, it WOULD BE ON THE 
SIDE OF THIS AMENDMENT, admitting 
its raw material cheaper. 

There are 45 ITEMS IN THE SUGAR 
SCHEDULE. ALL EXCEPT THE LAST 
item refers to RAW SUGAR ONLY and the 
rates were not altered. On the item touching 
REFINED SUGAR A SLIGHT REDUC- 
TION WAS MADE. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 27. May 29th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted for increase of 
duty over the House Bill on barley from 24 to 30 cents 
a bushel." — Foss Circular. 



35 



Lod§:e Stood for the 
Farmers ! 
No Change, is this 
Increase ? 



The barley duty was a subject of mucli contro- 
versy BETWEEN THE BREWING AND 
THE FARMING INTERESTS. The BREW- 
ERS WISHED A EOWER DUTY and the 
FARMERS OPPOSED IT. Under existing 
law the duty was 30 cents a bushel. The House 
lowered it to 24 cents. The Senate restored it 
to 30 cents, where it remained. 

NO CHANGE FROM DINGlvEY LAW. 



No. 28. May 31st, 1909. ''Senator Lodge voted for increase of 
duties on lemons from i 1-4 to i 1-2 cents a pound." 

— JPoss Circular. 



Increase of i-4c per 
Pound. Italy or 
California, Which ? 



This was an increase over existing law. CALI- 
FORNIA showed she COULD NOT COM- 
PETE WITH ITALY in eastern markets, 
owing to the cost of freight. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 29. 



Lodge Voted Re- 
duction from 2c to 
1 1-2C on Beef 



May 31st, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against motion to 
reconsider duty on fresh beef." — I^oss Circular. 

The EXISTING LAW provided a DUTY OF 
2 CENTS PER POUND ON FRESH BEEF. 
The HOUSE REDUCED it TO i 1-2 CENTS 
per pound. The Senate restored the 2 cent 
rate, but subsequently agreed to i 1-2 cents. 
SENATOR LODGE VOTED FOR i 1-2 
CENTS ABOUND IN THE CONFERENCE 
REPORT ON AUGUST 5th, 1909. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



Nos.30,3i,32,33 0une 5th, 1909 



"Senator Lodge voted for Com- 
mittee's increase on Cotton 
Cloth." — I^oss Circular. 



Yes ! In some 
Instances it was 
Necessary 
Cheap Clothes not 
Affected ! 

Expensive Cottons 
Slightly Increased ! 
Read Why ! 



These increases referred exclusively to cotton 
cloths of which the wholesale value exceeded 7, 
9, 10 and 12 cents per yard. IN EACH IN- 
STANCE the EXISTING RATE OF DUTY 
WAS RETAINED FOR CHEAP COTTON 
CLOTH. The reason for the increase on the 
more expensive kind is as follows : THE DUTY 
ON COTTON CLOTH W^AS GRADED under 
the Dingley Bill ACCORDING TO THE 
NUMBER OF THREADS PER SQUARE 
36 



INCH OF CLOTH. Experience showed that 
this was not satisfactory, because the FOREIGN 
MANUFACTURERS at once TOOK ADVAN- 
TAGE OF THE SITUATION. For instance, 
under the Dingley Eaw a piece of cotton cloth, 
counting 50 threads to the square inch, was ad- 
mitted at a duty of from i to 2 cents per yard- 
At once the foreign manufacturers saw an oppor- 
tunity to manufacture a very handsome and ex- 
pensive cloth, something in the nature of a 
valuable cotton tapestry and other drapery, for 
instance, of which the foundation contained but 
50 threads to the square inch. A duty of i or 2 
cents per yard for cloth of this nature was 
obviously absurd, and yet, as the law was 
drawn, no greater duty could be charged. For 
this reason, in the Payne Eaw, Congress pro- 
vided that ALL COTTON CLOTH WORTH 
LESS THAN 7 CENTS PER YARD WHOLE- 
SALE should be ADMITTED AT THE OLD 
RATE, but that CLOTH EXCEEDING 7 
CENTS in value SHOULD BE ADMITTED 
AT A SERIES OF HIGHER RATES TO 
MEET THE EVASION EXPLAINED 
ABOVE. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 34. June 7th, 1909. "vSenator Lodge voted for the Committee's 
increase of duty on cotton window Hollands." 

— I^oss Circular . 

This was an amendment providing that WIN- 
DOW HOLLANDS SHOULD BE CLASSED 
WITH COTTON CLOTH, FILLED OR 
Window Hollands COATED. Obviously, window Hollands ought 

Put in Proper Class properly to be classed in that way. Mr. Foss is 
correct in saying that this resulted in an in- 
creased duty on window Hollands, BUT THE 
DUTY ON COTTON CLOTH, FILLED OR 
COATED, WAS NOT RAISED. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 35. June 7th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against the amend- 
ment removing the i cent per yard additional duty on 
mercerized cotton cloth." — Foss Circular. 



37 



This is True 
There is a Reason 
Should Imitation 
Silk Cotton Come in 
as Common Cotton ? 



AT THE TIME OF THE DINGEEY EAW 
there was NO SUCH THING AS MERCER- 
IZED COTTON. SINCE THAT TIME a 
process has been INVENTED FOR MANU- 
FACTURING COTTON IN IMITATION OF 
SILK. It was felt that in all justice a higher 
duty should be charged for this luxury instead 
of admitting it at the same rate as common 
cloth. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY EAW. 



No. 36. June 7th, 1909. "Senator Eodge voted for increased duty 
on Cotton Gloves." — J^oss Circular. 



We Want the Cotton 
Glove Industry in 
this Country 



This was done so that the manufacture of cotton 
gloves in this country might be developed. The 
United States Government itself had recently 
been obliged to place a large order for the U. S. 
Army for cotton gloves abroad. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 



^ c. J June 9th, 1909 I "Senator Lodge voted for Committee's 

OS. 37, 3 I j^^g ^^^^ j^^g ^ increase (over House Bill) from 25 cents 
on top waste and 20 cents on garnetted waste to 30 cents 
on both. Also for increase (over House Bill) from 20 cents 
to 25 cents on shoddy and from 18 cents to 20 cents on 
noils." — Foss Circular. 

These increases were not increases over existing 
law but increases over the House Bill. 

NO CHANGE FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No Increase Over 
Din§:ley Law 



No. 39 to 53. June loth, nth, 12th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted 
against all amendments to the wool schedule offered by 
Senators hostile to the Tariff Bill." — Foss Circular. 



Dingley Law Re- 
mained Practically 
Unchanged 
Reduction on Wool, 
Meant Reduction on 
Carded Worsted and 
Worsted 



Duties on wool could not be reduced without 
reducing even more all duties on woolens, both 
carded and worsted. Duties on woolens could 
not be reduced unless duties on raw wool were 
also reduced. If the duties on raw wool had 
been reduced, the Senators from wool-growing 
States would have voted against the bill, and 
the bill would have failed. IF THE BILL 
HAD FAILED, ALL THE REDUCTIONS 
INCLUDING THOSE ON LUMBER, IRON 



;{8 



It also Meant Failure 
of the Bill. It Meant 
No Reduction on 
Lumber, Meats, 
Iron Ore, Vegetables, 
Coal, Scrap Iron, etc. 
It Meant No Free 
Hides. No Free Oil. 
No Custom's Court, 
etc ! No Tariff 
Commission ! 



ORE, COAIv AND SCRAP IRON, AS WELL 
AS FREE HIDES, FREE OIL, FREE ART, 
FREE TRADE WITH THE PHILIPPINES 
AND THE CUSTOMS COURT, THE MAX- 
IMUM AND MINIMUM PROVISIONS AND 
THE TARIFF COMMISSION WOULD 
HAVE BEEN LOST. The Dingley Bill would 
have remained law to-day and probably for the 
next three years. The wool schedule was left 
substantially unchanged, in order to save the 
bill and all the reductions it carried. 

There were, however, three slight reductions, 
but no increase whatever in the wool schedule. 

PRACTICALLY NO CHANGE FROM 
DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 54. June 12th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted for admission of 
works of art free of duty." — Foss Circular. 



Yes ! Don't You 
Want Works of Art 
Free? 



The Finance Committee recommended it, and he 
thought that no injustice would be done to do- 
mestic producers. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No- 55- June i6th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against free 
zinc." — Foss Circular. 



Lodge Voted for 
Reduction 



This AMENDMENT was DEFEATED BY 49 
NAYS TO 16 YEAS. EVERY PROGRES- 
SIVE VOTED AGAINST IT. The DUTY 
ON ZINC WAS I 1-2 CENTS PER POUND 
under existing law. Senator Lodge voted to 
reduce it TO i 3-8 CENTS PER POUND in 
conference report. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 56. June 17th, 1909. "Senator Lodgd voted against reducing 
specific duty on picture cords from 3 to 2 cents per 
pound . ' ' — Foss Circular. 

This vote cannot be identified or else the descrip- 

What is tills tion is misleading. "Picture cords" is probably 

Mr. Foss? a misprint for "picture cards." Senator Bris- 

tow offered an amendment to make the picture 

card item "2 cents a pound and 15 PER CENT 



39 



AD VALOREM," which Senator Lodge voted 
against. It is impossible to determine the effect 
of this amendment, as it apparently bears no 
relation either to the paper schedules of the 
Dingley Law or those of the Payne Law- 



No. 57. June 17th, 1909. "Senator Lodge VOTED AGAINST 
A REDUCTION on common window glass." 

Misleading. The Dingley Law imposed a duty of i 3-8 cents 

This is the Old Story per pound on cheap common window glass. The 

It was an Amend- Senate Committee on Finance had already re- 

ment to Further duced this to i 1-8 cents per pound, and Senator 

Reduce * r j^ > 

.' Lodge's vote was cast against any further re- 

1 3-8c^t0 TT4C Auction to I cent per pound. The duty was 

per Pound finally placed at i 1-4 cents per pound. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



Nos, 58 and 59. June 18th, 1909. "Senator Lodge voted against free 
print paper and for an increase of duty over the Payne 
Bill as it passed the House, on print paper from i-io to 
2-10 cents per pound." — Foss Circular . 

These votes were cast in opposition to the 
NEWSPAPERS' FIGHT FOR FREE print 
PAPER. 
A Reduction The rate of duty under existing law was 3-10 

cents per pound. The House Bill favored i-io 
cents per pound. The Senate raised that figure 
to 2-10 cents per pound, but finally compromised 
on 3-10 cents per pound. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



No. 60. June 22d, 1909. "Senator Lodge VOTED AGAINST 
FREE HIDES and leather, free boots and shoes." 

— Foss Circular . 

He voted for free hides and against free leather 
and boots and shoes. Under existing law, hides 
Lodge Voted for were dutiable at 15 per cent, most kinds of leather 

Free Hides. See at 20 per cent, boots and shoes at 25 per cent- 

No. 67 Senator Lodge voted in the Conference Report 

And Reduction on (August 5th, 1909) for free hides, leather duty 
Boots and Shoes from 5 to 15 percent, boots and shoes from 10 to 

15 per cent. 

(See Statement No. 67.) 
DECREASE FROM DINGLEY LAW- 

40 



6i. June 22nd, i905H-"Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST 15% 
DUTY ON HIDES."— Fo^^ Circular. 

Senator LODGE WAS THE FOREMOST AD- 
VOCATE OF FREE HIDES SO OF COURSE 
HE VOTED AGAINST THE DUTY OF 15%. 
HE WAS, however, OUTVOTED. It is a fact 
worthy of note that 8 DEMOCRATS AND 6 
PROGRESSIVES from the Agricultural States 
(INCLUDING SENATOR CUMMINS, SEN- 
ATOR DOLLIVER AND SENATOR BRIS- 
TOW) VOTED FOR the duty. 



Is this fair Mr. Foss? 
Why don't you say 
Lodge Advocated 
Hides with no Duty ! 
Fact! 



62. June 23rd, 1909) 

63. June 23rd, 1909) 

64. June 23rd, 1909) 



"Senator Lodge voted against reductions in 
certain kinds of lumber and for his Commit- 
tee's amendments." — Foss Circtdar. 



Lumber Reduced 
from ic to 1-2C per 
Cubic Foot ! 
Whitewood Boards 
$1 to 50c per 
Thousand 
Sawed Lumber 
$2 to $1.25 per 
Thousand 
There Were Other 
Reductions 
Gifford Pinchot 
Opposed to Free 
Lumber 



Under the EXISTING LAW THE DUTY ON 
TIMBER was ONE CENT PER CUBIC FOOT. 
The PAYNE LAW REDUCED IT TO V^ 
CENT PER CUBIC FOOT. BOARDS made of 
white-wood, etc., WERE $1 PER 1000 but were 
REDUCED TO 50 CENTS PER 1000. 
SAWED LUMBER was $2 PER 1000 but was 
REDUCED TO $1.25 per 1000 and CORRE- 
SPONDING REDUCTIONS WERE MADE 
ON ALL KINDS OF PLANED LUMBER. 
FOR ALL THESE REDUCTIONS SENATOR 
LODGE VOTED. There were no increases in 
the lumber schedule. In this connection it is well 
to call attention to the letter of GIFFORD 
PINCHOT, FORESTER, to the Chairman of the 
Ways and Means Committee, advising 
AGAINST FREE LUMBER AS A MENACE 
TO FOREST CONSERVATION. This letter is 
dated March loth, 1909. (See Congressional 
Record, ist Session, 6ist Congress, page ii35-) 
REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



65. June 23rd, 1909 — "Senator Lodge VOTED 
AMENDMENT providing DUTY OF i 
POUND ON pineapples."— Fow Circular. 



AGAINST 
CENT PER 



Absurd ! 

This was a Proposed 
Increase ! Offered 
by a Democrat ! 



Perhaps Mr. Foss did not know that this was a 
proposed increase in duty. The amendment was 
offered by a Democratic Senator from Florida. 
The amendment was carried. The Dingley Law 



41 



Lodge Voted 
Against Increase 
of ic 



imposed a duty of 7 cents per cubic foot on 
pineapples. The Payne Law carried a duty of 8 
cents per cubic foot. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 



66. June 23rd, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST RE- 
DUCTION OF DUTY ON BITUMINOUS COAL FROM 
60 TO 40 cents per ton." — Foss Circ7ilar. 



Yes, be Fair ! 
Lodge Agreed to 
45c 

Reduction from 67c 
to 45c 



The Dingley Law provided 67 cents per ton duty. 
The SENATE COMMITTEE on Finance 
RECOMMENDED 60 CENTS PER TON but 
subsequently, ON INVESTIGATION, RE- 
DUCED IT TO 45 CENTS PER TON, the figure 
FINALLY ADOPTED WITH SENATOR 
LODGE'S CONCURRENCE. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



67. June 24th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED TO INCREASE 
(over the House Bill) DUTIES ON BOOTS AND SHOES 
FROM 15% TO 20% r —Foss Cirailar. 

Boots and shoes under existing law were at 25%. 
The HOUSE REDUCED THEM TO 15% IN 
EXCHANGE for the benefit OF FREE 
HIDES. Now it will be observed that on June 
22nd (two days previously) the Senate (against 
Senator Lodge's vote) had imposed a duty of 
15% on hides. Obviously, boots and shoes were 
entitled to some increase over the House rate as 
a compensation ! 

Ultimately WHEN HIDES WERE MADE 
FREE Senator LODGE VOTED TO REDUCE 
BOOTS AND SHOES TO 10 PER CENT 
AND 15 PER CENT. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



This is only a Half 
Truth ! 

When Hides Were 
Free He Voted for 
10 per cent and 
15 per cent reduction 
on Boots and Shoes 



68. June 24th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge voted against free hides and 
leather products." — Foss Circular. 



See No. 60 



See explanation of same vote on June 22nd, 1909. 
(Statement No. 60.) 



69. June 25th, 1909) "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST 

70. June 25th, 1909) FREE SCRAP iron and against reduction to 

a dollar per ton." — Foss Circular. 



42 



Scrap Iron Duty 
was $4 per Ton 
Senate Reduced to 
$2.50 per Ton 
Finally $i per Ton 



The EXISTING LAW CHARGED A DUTY 
OF $4 PER TON on scrap iron. THE SENATE 
had already reduced this to $2.50 per ton. 
FINALLY $1 A TON WAS AGREED to when 
the Payne Bill passed. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



71. June 25th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge voted for an increase (OVER 
HOUSE BILL) on wire nails from Y^ cent to >^ cent per 
pound." — Foss Circular. 



Lodge Voted for 
Existing Law ! 
Later for Reduction 



The existing- law charged a duty of ^ cent per 
pound. Senator Lodge voted to retain this 
figure. SUBSEQUENTLY HE VOTED FOR 
A REDUCTION to 4/10 cents per pound. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



72. June 25th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED FOR AN IN- 
CREASE of duty (OVER HOUSE BILL) on Monazite sand 
and Thorite FROM 4 CENTS to 6 cents per pound." — 
Foss Circular. 



The Dingley Law 
was 6c per Pound ! 
Payne Law is 4c 
per pound 



The existing law charged a duty of 6 cents per 
pound. Subsequently SENATOR LODGE 
AGREED TO A REDUCTION TO 4 CENTS 
PER POUND, which is the duty under the 
Payne Law. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



"J},. June 25th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge did not vote on amendment 
placing a duty on crude petroleum." — Foss Circular. 



Lodge Paired ! 
Against Petroleum 
Duty! 
Fact 



SENATOR LODGE WAS PAIRED against 
this duty AND IT WAS SO ANNOUNCED. 
(CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, ist Session, 
6ist CONGRESS, PAGE 3827.) 
This was the exact equivalent of a vote against 
the duty (SEE EXPLANATION ABOUT 
"PAIRS" AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS 
PAMPHLET). 

The amendment failed. Under the Dingley Law 
crude PETROLEUM WAS FREE IN CER- 
TAIN CASES and DUTIABLE IN OTHER 
CASES. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



43 



74- June 26th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge did not vote on amendment 
for free agricultural implements." — Foss Circular. 

HE WAS PAIRED AGAINST IT, which is ex- 
Lodge Paired ^^^.^^ equivalent to a vote. 
Duty Unchanged! xhis duty was not changed. 

NO CHANGE FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



75. June 26th, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE on 
amendment reducing the duty on cash registers from 30% to 
15%-" — Poss Circular. 

He was paired against it, which is exactly 
, , p ■ ,1 1 equivalent to a vote. 

Loage Paired. ^j^^ EXISTING LAW CHARGED 45% on 

Reduction 45 per ^^^j^ registers. SENATOR LODGE had already 
cent to 30 per cent vOTED FOR A REDUCTION TO 30% and 
Cash Registers! OPPOSED FURTHER REDUCTION. 

THE PAYNE LAW CARRIED 30%. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



76. June 26th, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE on 
amendment for free sawed lumber." — Foss Circular. 

Paired! HE WAS PAIRED AGAINST IT, which is ex- 

See No. 62 actly equivalent to a vote. (See statement No. 

Lumber 62.) 



yy. June 26th, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON 
AMENDMENT FOR FREE JUTE GRAIN BAGS."— Fo.y^ 
Circular. 

Correct_! NO CHANGE FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



78. June 28th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge voted against an amendment 
reducing duties on metals." — Foss Circular. 

<, Nn /; Nn 7 This was an amendment comprising several 

^T o XT i amendments ALREADY VOTED UPON. (See 

No. 8, No. 9 , , ^ ^r ^ Q A r.\ 

statements Nos. 7, 8 and 9.) 



79. June 28th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge voted against admission of text 
books free of duty." — Foss Circular. 

SEVENTEEN DEMOCRATS VOTED FOR 

THIS AMENDMENT. 

FIFTEEN DEMOCRATS WOULD NOT 

VOTE. 

44 



This Amendment ALL REPUBLICANS, INCLUDING PRO- 

would Cripple Mass. GRESSIVES, voted AGAINST IT. 

Printers and Pub- All books in English over 20 years old had al- 

lishers Leading In- ready been made free in the bill. It was felt that 

dustriest PUBLISHERS, PRINTERS AND BOOK- 

All Hands Against BINDERS had rights to be considered. 

It! NO CHANGE FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



80. June 28th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST FREE 
SALT." — Foss Circular. 

SO DID ALL THE PROGRESSIVES. 
Why Not? The Senate had already reduced the duty on salt 

Reduction from 12c ^'^^ '^ ""^^ P^^ ^°° P°'^"^' ^° '° ^^"^' P^' '°° 
to IOC Sufficient! pounds. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY DUTY. 



81. June 28th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST 
AMENDMENT abolishing remittance of duty on salt used 
in curing." — Foss Circular. 

Mr Foss Wrong Mr. FOSS evidently DOES NOT UNDER- 

Aeain' IfLodee STAND the bearing of this vote. 

W^^ VntPd ^^ Fn«s<i Salt used in curing export meats and fish is now 

Had Voted as Foss ^^^^ ^^ SENATOR LODGE HAD VOTED 

wants It would Have ^^^ ^^^^ AMENDMENT IT WOULD 

Made a Duty of lOc ^^^^ mKD^ THIS SALT DUTIABLE AT 

per Pound ! ^^ CENTS PER 100 POUNDS. 



82. June 28th, 1909— "Senator Lodge voted AGAINST FREE COT- 
TON TIES."— Foj.y Circular. 

The duty on cotton ties was 5/10 cents per pound 
True! The Senate ^nder existing law. The Senate had already re- 
Had Reduced it! duced it to 3/10 cents, where it remained in the 
5- IOC to 3-lOc! Payne Law. 

REDUCTION FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



83. June 29th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST A 
DUTY ON TEA OF 10 cents per pound proposed by Senator 
Tillman (Democrat) of South Carolina." 

^ ^ „. . -r A TAX ON TEA HAS BEEN DEMOCRATIC 
Do You Want a Tax DOCTRINE but NEVER REPUBLICAN 

^^'^^^* DOCTRINE. 

45 



84. July 2nd, 1909— "SENATOR LODGE VOTED FOR THE 
CORPORATION TAX." 



Certainly He Did ! 
Yes Foss Says He is 
the "Tool of the 
Corporations ! " 



He voted for it because he thought it a just way 
of raising revenue. IT has proved exceedingly 
remunerative for the government but HAS BEEN 
STRONGLY OPPOSED IN BOTH COURTS 
AND ELSEWHERE BY THE CORPORA- 
TIONS. 



55. July 2nd, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST 
SENATOR BACON'S MOTION TO EXCEPT from tax 
FRATERNAL, CHARITABLE and RELIGIOUS 
ORGANIZATIONS, MUTUAL BENEFIT INSURANCE 
COMPANIES and CORPORATIONS DOING LESS 
THAN $250,000 WORTH OF BUSINESS."— Fo.y.y Circular. 

As can be seen by reading the text of the bill 
THE ONLY NEW MATTER PROPOSED by 
SENATOR BACON WAS TO EXEMPT 
CORPORATIONS DOING LESS THAN 
$250,000 WORTH OF BUSINESS. It will also 
be observed that THE ADOPTION OF 
BACON'S AMENDMENT WOULD HAVE 
CUT OFF THE EXEMPTION ACCORDED 
TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS. 
Senator Lodge is no demagogue, but he believes 
that every business corporation, great or small, 
should pay a portion of its profits toward gov- 
ernment support. 



Lodge Protects Labor 
Organizations ! 
Lodge No 
Demagogue ! 
Big and Little 
Business Should 
Pay Their Share ! 



86. July 3rd, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE on Senator 
Gore's RECIPROCITY AMENDMENT."— Fo.f.y Circular. 

Senator LODGE WAS PAIRED against this 
amendment, which was exactly equivalent to 
voting against it. As a matter of fact this 
amendment (which Mr. Foss calls a reciprocity 
amendment) DOES NOT APPEAR UNDER 
THAT NAME IN THE OFFICIAL RECORD. 
THE FACTS are as follows: An amendment to 
the tariff bill had just been offered by Senator 
Lodge's Committee providing for a maximum 
and minimum tariff, which is in the nature of a 
reciprocity agreement. To this amendment 
Senator Gore (Democrat) offered an amend- 
ment of his own of the same nature. The Com- 
mittee naturally preferred the amendment that it 
had proposed itself. THE SENATE PRE- 



Paired ! 

Not a Reciprocity 

Amendment as 

Stated! 

Read the Facts! 



46 



Democrats Against 
This Mr. Foss ! 



FERRED THE COMMITTEE'S AMEND- 
MENT by the overwhelming vote of 39 to 16, 
ONLY 13 OUT OF THE 32 DEMOCRATS 
VOTING WITH SENATOR GORE. 



S/. July 3rd, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE on Senator 
Dolliver's amendment providing (FOR A) REAL TARIFF 
COMMISSION."— i^ow Circular. 



Paired ! 

Same as Voting 
Lodge Voted for and 
Favored a "Real" 
Commission Now 
Existing ! 



Senator Lodge was paired against it and events 
have proved him right. 

The Tariff Commission provided for in the bill 
and supported by Senator Lodge has proved 
REAL and is doing; excellent work. 



July 3rd, 1909 — "Senator Lodge did not vote on the maximum 
and minimum paragraphs." — I^oss Cii-cular. 



Foss Always Forgets 
"Pairs" 
Lodge Favored 
Maximum and 
Minimum ! 



HE WAS PAIRED IN THEIR FAVOR and 
THAT IS THE EXACT EQUIVALENT OF A 
VOTE. HE had also INTRODUCED BILLS 
FOR A MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM TARIFF 
in previous Congresses. 



89. July 5th, 1909— "SENATOR LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON 
INCOME TAX RESOLUTION."— Fo.y.y Circular. 



Lodge Favored 
Income Tax Reso- 
lution ! 
Tell the Truth Foss ! 



The Resolution was 
Reported by Lodge's 
Committee ! 

Republicans and 
Democrats Favored 
It! 

Foss Tell the People, 
Do You, or Do You 
Not Know These 
Facts ! 



He was PAIRED IN ITS FAVOR, which is the 
exact equivalent of a vote. This statement in the 
Foss circular is clearly misleading. The facts are 
as follows : Senator Lodge was paired with Sen- 
ator Clay (Democrat) of Georgia all through the 
tariff session. If Senator Lodge was absent his 
vote was reckoned with the Republican majority 
of the Finance Committee unless otherwise 
stated. If Senator Clay was absent his vote was 
reckoned with the Democratic minority of the 
Finance Committee unless otherwise stated. 
The INCOME TAX RESOLUTION WAS RE- 
PORTED from Senator Lodge's Committee (the 
Finance Committee). The Republican majority 
reported it and the Democratic minority was 
favorable to it. Therefore, as EVERY SEN- 
ATOR OR CONGRESSMAN IN WASHING- 
TON OUGHT TO KNOW, unless a statement 
was made to the contrary. Senator Lodge and 
Senator Clay would both be reckoned as favor- 
able to the Resolution. 



47 



MR. FOSS, HOWEVER, IS INEXPERI- 
ENCED and may not have known the rule, but 
it is DIFFICULT TO SEE HOW THE FOL- 
LOWING STATEMENT WAS OVER- 
LOOKED WHEN THE RECORD WAS EX- 
AMINED TO SEE HOW SENATOR LODGE 
VOTED. 

The vote was taken unexpectedly on July 5th, 
1909, when both Senator Clay and Senator Lodge 
were absent. The following statement is taken 
from the Congressional Record, 6ist Congress, 
1st Session, page 4121 : 

"Mr. Bacon (when Mr. Clay's name was 
called), T again announce that my col- 
league (Mr. Clay) is necessarily absent. 
If he were present he would vote "Yea." 
He is paired with the Senior Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Lodge), who, I pre- 
sume, would also vote "Yea" if present.' " 



90. July 7th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST (the) 
AMENDMENT reducing duty on writing paper."— 
Foss Circular. 

There are SIX ITEMS IN THE WRITING 

Writine Paoer PAPER SCHEDULE, four referring to writing 

6 Items paper and two to envelopes. TWO of these items 

4 Refer tn WERE LOWERED, TWO WERE RAISED 

Writine Paoer ^"^ ^^^ REMAINED THE SAME. THE 

2 Refer to AMENDMENT in question REFERRED TO 

Envelopes °"^ *-''' both of the two items on which the duty 

2 Were Lowered ^^^ raised, to wit : WRITING PAPER WEIGH- 

2 Remained Same ^^^ ^^^ MORE THAN 15 POUNDS per ream. 

2 increased to Keep ^ow, the EVIDENCE SHOWED tha. THIS 

Out Daneerous ^^^^ precisely the GRADE OF WRITING 

Competition' PAPER most IN DANGER FROM FOREIGN 

COMPETITION. 

INCREASE OVER DINGLEY LAW. 



91. July 7th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST FREE 
AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS."— Fo.y.f Circular. 

Yes for the Third This was the third time that Senator Bacon 
Time I offered this amendment (See statement No. 74). 



92. July 7th, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON CUS- 
TOMS COURT."— Foss Circular. 



48 



X 



Paired in Favor He was paired in its favor, which is exactly 

lyir. Foss! equivalent to a vote. 



93- July 7th, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON 
Senator Bailey's AMENDMENT TO INCOME TAX 
RESOLUTION."— Fow Circular. 

He was PAIRED AGAINST IT, which is ex- 
Tu^ r»-,o^i ♦• actly equivalent to a vote. 

pLs^Tavs ^'^ INCOME-TAX RESOLUTION had 
u!fn w>^ T J PASSED TWO DAYS BEFORE with Senator 

Before With Lodge LODGE PAIRED IN ITS FAVOR. 
In Favor! Senator BAILEY'S AMENDMENT was so 

drawn as to include A FEDERAL INHERIT- 
ANCE TAX. AGAINST WHICH THE 
MASSACHUSETTS LEGISLATURE HAD 
JUST PASSED A RESOLUTION. 



94. July 7th, 1909— "SENATOR LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON 
AN AMENDMENT exempting from tax corporations doing 
less than $150,000 business a ye^ir."— Foss Circular. 

Paired Against It ! He was paired against it, which is exactly 
equivalent to a vote. 



95- July 7th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge did not vote on amendment ex- 
empting from tax corporations doing less than $250,000 a 
year." — Foss Circular. 

Correct -^^ "^^^ paired against it, which is exactly 

equivalent to a vote. 



96. July 7th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge did not vote on Senator Mc- 
Laurin's amendment exempting from tax corporations 
capitalized at $50,000 or less." — Foss Circular. 

Correct ^^ ^^^^ PAIRED AGAINST IT, which is exactly 

equivalent to a vote. 



97. July 8th, 1909— "Senator LODGE VOTED AGAINST A TAX 
ON CONTRACTS for GRAIN, COTTON AND OTHER 
agricultural products." — Foss Circular. 

Lodge Does Not Such a tax would be almost impossible to collect 

Wish to Burden the and would be unnecessarily burdensome to 
Farmers! farmers. 

49 



98. July 8th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge did not vote on amendments re- 
ducing tobacco tax." — Foss Circular. 

Tnh rrn Tn ^'^^ Finance Committee did not recommend this 

, reduction. A tobacco tax is generally considered 

Necessary j • ui 

•^ desirable. 



99. July 8th, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON 
SENATOR CURTIS' AMENDMENT FOR a countervailing 
DUTY ON PETROLEUM."— Fo.y:r Circular. 

TT^ iir *u * The Finance Committee did not recommend this 

He Was Absent 

countervailmg duty. 



100. July 8th, 1909— "Senator Lodge DID NOT VOTE FOR AN 
AMENDMENT for FREE HIDES and leather goods."— 
Foss Circular. 

Third Time This was the third time that amendment was 

See No. 60 offered. (See statement No. 60.) 



loi. July 8th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge voted against free asphaltum 
and bitumen." — Foss Circular. 

MklPijdinfrTrnthl ^^^' ^^^ ^^ VOTED TO LOWER THE 
^ • DUTY PROVIDED IN THE HOUSE BILL. 

NO CHANGE FROM DINGLEY LAW. 



102. July 8th, 1909— "Senator Lodge DID NOT VOTE ON 
AMENDMENT FOR FREE COTTON TIES."— Fo,y.y 
Circular. 



Paired ! 
See No. 82 



He was paired against it, which is exactly 
equivalent to a vote. THIS WAS THE SECOND 
TIME THIS AMENDMENT WAS OFFERED. 
(See Statement No. 82.) 



103. July 8th, 1909— "SENATOR LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON 
TARIFF COMMISSION."— Fo.y^ Circular. 

^^ ., SENATOR LODGE DID VOTE FOR THE 

^P N »7 TARIFF COMMISSION provided in the bill and 

beeiNO. 87 REPORTED BY HIS COMMITTEE. (See 

Statement No. 87.) 

50 



I04. July 8th, 1909— "Senator LODGE DID NOT VOTE ON PAS- 
SAGE OF TARIFF BILL." 



Once More! 
Paired in Favor ! 



He was PAIRED IN ITS FAVOR, which is ex- 
actly EQUIVALENT TO A VOTE. 



105. August 5th, 1909 — "Senator Lodge voted for conference report 



Yes! HE VOTED FOR IT BECAUSE OUT OF 874 

With 644 Decreases CHANGES 654 WERE DECREASES FROM 

out of the EXISTING LAW. 
874 Changes 

He Did Not Kill ! 

1 The Customs 

Court 

2 The Maximum 

and Minimum 
Provisions 

3 Free Trade with 

the Philippines 

4 The Tariff Com- 

mission 

5 Free Hides 

6 Free Oil 
T Free Art 

8 Reduction on 

Scrap Iron 

9 Reduction on 

Iron Ore 

10 Reduction on 
Bituminous Coal 

1 1 Reduction on 
Lumber 

12 Reduction on 
Beef 

13 Reduction on 
Mutton 



He voted for it because it was a great improve- 
ment over the existing law. 

Because to have voted against it would have de- 
feated : 

The Customs Court. 

The Maximum and Minimum Provisions. 

Free Trade with the Philippines, for which 

he had labored for years. 
The Tariff Commission. 

He voted for it because to have voted against it 
would have defeated : 

FREE HIDES, FREE OIL and 
FREE ART. 

Because a vote against it would have prevented 
the reduction of duties on scrap iron, iron ore. 
bituminous coal, lumber, beef, mutton, pork, 
tallow, lard, bacon, hams, veal and numberless 
other articles of household use. 



14 Reduction on 

Pork 

15 Reduction on 

Tallow 

16 Reduction on 

Lard 

17 Reduction on 

Bacon 



18 Reduction on 
Ham and Veals, 
etc., etc. 

He Wanted and Ob- 
tained Reductions on 
Numberless House- 
hold Articles Also ! 



NORMAN H. WHITE, 

105 Gardner Road, 

Brookline, Mass. 
51 



FACTS IN REFERENCE TO SENATOR LODGE'S 

VOTES ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO 

SCHEDULE K 

BY 

WINTHROP L. MARVIN 
Secy of the National Association of Wool Manufacturers 



In a circular widely distributed throughout Massachusetts, 
Governor-elect FOSS ATTACKS SENATOR LODGE for voting 
with the protectionist majority in Congress on proposed amendments 
to Schedule K. 

The points referred to in that circular which are of vital conse- 
quence to Massachusetts are the proposed reductions of duty on the 
finished goods, the products of the skilled labor of our factories. The 
circular first attacks Mr. Lodge FOR "THE RESTORATION OF 
THE NOTORIOUS AND OUTRAGEOUS DINGLEY DUTY ON 
WOOL TOPS." THE DUTY ON WOOL TOPS WAS NOT 
"RESTORED" in the Payne tariff. On the contrary, THIS DUTY 
WAS REDUCED in response to the request of Massachusetts manu- 
facturers, with the hearty support of Mr. Lodge. The present duty on 
tops is not "actually higher than the duty on finished cloth." It is 
lower than the duty on the yarns out of which the cloth is made. This 
particular attack on Mr. Lodge is ignorant and baseless. 

Still another charge in this circular against Senator Lodge is that 
he voted against the amendments of the late Senator Dolliver reducing 
the protective duties on flannels, blankets, dress goods, cloths, etc. 
Senator LODGE did vote against those amendments, and in doing 
this he SAFEGUARDED THE LIFE AND PROSPERITY OF 
ONE OF THE GREATEST INDUSTRIES OF MASSA- 
CHUSETTS. Mr. Dolliver's amendments would have cut the actual 
protective rates below those of the disastrous Gorman-Wilson tarifif. 
Even that Democratic tariff, which made wool free, provided a pro- 
tective duty of 40 and 50 per cent, on cloths and dress goods, as 
against the 50 and 55 per cent, of the Dingley and Aldrich-Payne laws. 

52 



But MR. DOLLIVER proposed a DUTY as low as 35 per cent, which 
WOULD HAVE CLOSED OUTRIGHT MOST OF THE 200 
WOOLEN MILLS OF MASSACHUSETTS. Of that GORMAN- 
WILSON TARIFF Mr. Dolliver, then a member of the House, had 
said in 1897: — 

"The woolen factories of New England never asked 
for free wool, and they accepted it with doubts and fears; 
nor is it too much to say that all their fears have been 
realized, for the statement made by our honored leader 
(Mr. Dingley) as to the effect of this legislation on the 
farm and factory and on the Treasury is fully cor- 
roborated by the official reports. It was intended only to 
slaughter the sheep; it HAS OPERATED TO 
SLAUGHTER THE FACTORIES AND to slaughter 

THE TREASURY What has actually 

happened may be stated in a few plain words and figures. 
Ten million sheep driven to the slaughter; 80,000,000 
pounds of American wool displaced in our own markets ; 
the importation of cloth multiplied by two; half the 
woolen mills idle and locked up and the other half on 
scant wages and short time." 

THIS IS AN EXACT contemporaneous DESCRIPTION of the 
practical effect of the Gorman-Wilson duties AS GIVEN BY MR. 
DOLLIVER HIMSELF. YET in 1909 MR. DOLLIVER, for 
reasons no man has ever been able to understand, PROPOSED 
WORSE THAN THE GORMAN-WILSON DUTIES. OF 
COURSE, SENATOR LODGE VOTED AGAINST THE 
DESTRUCTION OF THE WOOLEN INDUSTRY. If he had not 
he would have been recreant to the interests of the Commonwealth. 

Senator Lodge is attacked further in this circular by Mr. Foss 
because he voted "against Senator LaFollette's amendment reducing 
duties in Schedule K." THE LAFOLLETTE AMENDMENT EM- 
BODIED THE WORST SPIRIT OF SECTIONAL HATE. It 
retained the full duty on raw wool, changing it in form from a specific 
to an ad valorem duty of 45 per cent. — equivalent to the specific duty 
— and reduced the protective duties on cloths and dress goods — 
MAKING THE ENTIRE CUT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE 
MANUFACTURERS AND OPERATIVES OF NEW ENGLAND. 

53 



That LaFollette amendment in ITS PRACTICAL EFFECT IN- 
VOLVED THE ECONOMIC ABSURDITY OF RELATIVELY 
HIGHER PROTECTION ON THE CRUDE MATERIAL THAN 
ON THE FINISHED GOODS! It was indefensible from every 
standpoint of sound economics, honest faith and intelligent patriot- 
ism. SENATOR LODGE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE 
VOTED IN ANY OTHER WAY THAN AGAINST SUCH A 
VICIOUS SCHEME. 

Finally, as to Senator Lodge's action on the Cummins amend- 
ment to recommit Schedule K to the committee, it is true that he did 
vote against it — and so did almost all of the other Senators, Demo- 
cratic and Republican. The amendment was overwhelmingly re- 
jected by a vote of eight to fifty-nine. This was the significant fate of 
the last attack on Schedule K and the end of the discussion of the 
subject in the Senate. 

MASSACHUSETTS is THE GREATEST WOOL MANU- 
FACTURING STATE IN THE UNION. Our people make more 
than one-fourth of all the woolen fabrics produced in the United 
States. MANY THOUSANDS OF MASSACHUSETTS MEN 
AND WOMEN ARE DEPENDENT ON THE PROSPERITY OF 
THE WOOL MANUFACTURE FOR THEIR LIVELIHOOD. 
Those HOSTILE AMENDMENTS cutting down the protection of 
Schedule K were OFFERED IN EVERY INSTANCE BY 
SENATORS FROM DISTANT STATES, who knew little and cared 
less for Massachusetts industries. IN RESISTING those reckless 
partisan attacks upon Massachusetts prosperity, SENATOR LODGE 
WAS SIMPLY DOING HIS DUTY TO MASSACHUSETTS 
business men and Massachusetts wage-earners. 

HE DESERVES ALL HONOR for this, AND IT IS an 
EXTRAORDINARY thing THAT HE SHOULD BE ASSAILED 
BY A GOVERNOR-ELECT OF MASSACHUSETTS for renderin*^ 
an inestimable service to the Commonwealth. 



54 



I 



% 



\ 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



013 787 776 4^ 



